Planning Commission - 12/12/1983 AGENDA
londay, December 12, 1983
7:30 p.m., City Hall
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman William Bearman, Virginia Gartner, Robert Hallett,
Stan Johannes, Dennis Marhula, Ed Schuck, Hakon Torjesen
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Kate Karnas, Recording Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
III. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. CARMEL, by Hans Hagen Homes. Request for Planned Unit
Development District Review and Zoning District Change from
Rural to R1-13.5 and Preliminary Plat of 43 acres for single
family lots. Location: North of Rowland Road and West of
Old Shady Oak Road. A continued public hearing.
B. PRIMETECH,. by Prime Development and M R Properties. Request
for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment for a twenty
(20) acre office park to be known as Primetech Park, in the
City West Planned Unit Development. Location: West of
Highway 169/212, north of Shady Oak Road. A public hearing.
C. WELSH CONSTRUCTION. Request for Zoning District Change from
C-Regional to C-Regional Service of 3.26 acres for an office
building. Location: East of the Northeast corner of
Prairie Center Drive and West 78th Street. A public
hearing.
D. HUSTAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. Request for Rezoning from
C-Regional to C-Regional Service of approximately nine (9)
acres for a hotel and related commercial uses. Location:
Southeast quadrant of Highway 5/U.S. 169 and I-494. A
public meeting.
V. OLD BUSINESS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES _
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, December 12, 1983
7:30 p.m., City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman William Bearman, Virginia Gartner, Robert Hallett,
Stan Johannes, Ed Schuck
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dennis Marhula, Hakon Torjesen
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Kate Karnas, Recording Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Hallett, to adopt the agenda
as printed.
Motion carried--5-0-0
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
None. .
III. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
Proponent for Item III.A. was not present at the time for review of
the Carmel proposal .
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded Johannes, to continue Item
III.A. at the convenience of the Commission, and to hear the other
items on the agenda.
Motion carried--5-0-0
B. PRIMETECH, by Prime Development and M R Properties. Request
for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment for a twenty
(20) acre office park to be known as Primetech Park, in the
City West Planned Unit Development. Location: West of
Highway 169/212, north of Shady Oak Road. A public hearing.
Mr. Ron Erickson, Korsunsky, Krank, Erickson, Architects,
representing proponents, reviewed the request with the Commission.
Mr. Erickson explained the types of tenants for which the buildings
were being designed, including computer assembly and programming
companies, research and development companies, and other office
users. He added that potential corporate headquarters sites would
Planning Commission Minutes 2 December 12, 1983
be made available as well .
Mr. Erickson stated that he was aware of concern by the City that a
portion of the site was encroaching upon a previously designated
High Density Residential site within the overall City West Planned
Unit Development. He stated that, upon review, they had ascertained
that they were not encroaching upon the residential property.
Mr. Erickson added that all sides of all buildings would be brick.
He pointed out that the Concept Plan shown, while giving general
locations for the buildings, did not intend to represent exact
locations of buildings as the soils in the area may dictate
alternate locations.
Regarding the item in the Staff Report referring to a minimum of 75%
office use for the total site, Mr. Erickson stated that proponent
would request that it be changed to 65%. This would allow for up to
35% of the site to be used for warehousing space, assembly or
testing functions, and storage for high tech types of tenants.
Planner Enger reviewed the recommendations of the Staff Report
regarding this project. He stated that, due to the locations of the
buildings as noted on the Concept Plan, a lift station would be
required to service the property with public sewer. It was
suggested that amendment to the plan would eliminate the need for
the lift station. Planner Enger stated that there was still concern
as to whether the project encroached upon the designated High
Density Residential of the approved City West Planned Unit
Development.
Staff pointed out that the proposal appeared to have a greater
amount of ground cover than the approved Planned Unit Development
Concept for City West; however, upon calculation, it was found that
the floor area ratio was less than the maximum approved for the City
West Concept.
Planner Enger stated that the City Code anticipated 100% office use
within the Office Zoning District. Based on review of office
buildings, it was found that some portion of all office buildings
was allocated towards storage space, shipping and receiving, copying
area, etc. Based on this, the minimum of 75% office use was
suggested by Staff.
Chairman Bearman stated that he felt it was important to note that,
with this proposal, approximately 50% of the original City West
Planned Unit Development had been amended. He questioned whether
allowing less than 100% office for this area would be appropriate
and how such a structure would fit the zoning ordinance
requirements.
0 Schuck stated that he felt it would be difficult for the City to
lose the potential for such projects based on a percentage figure.
If the project fit the site and the basic intentions of the area, he
stated that he did not feel the exact percentage was important.
Planning Commission Minutes 3 December 12, 1983
Johannes stated that he agreed with Schuck, that a fixed percentage
was not appropriate in this case. He stated that he felt the key to
such projects would be how the buildings looked and matters such as
traffic impacts, as opposed to exact percentages.
Chairman Bearman stated that he was concerned that the area would
become an industrial park as opposed to an office park.
Hallett stated that he felt flexibility would be probable, dependent
upon the plan; but he concurred that an exact percentage was
inappropriate.
In response to the questions raised, Mr. Erickson stated that they
would immediately review the boundary to determine whether there was
any encroachment upon the designated High Density Residential area
of the original City West Planned Unit Development. Screening of
the rooftop mechanical equipment for the structures would be
architecturally integral with the structures' materials and design.
Mr. Erickson stated that 65% would be an acceptable minimum of
office use within the structures, but that he felt 75% would be too
restrictive.
Chairman Bearman asked for comments and questions from members of
ithe audience. There were none.
MOTION 1 :
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Schuck, to continue the
public hearing pending resolution of issues discussed at the
meeting.
Gartner stated that she felt a guideline of 75% would be
appropriate, but that if proponent felt less than 75% should be
used, each building could be reviewed on an individual basis.
Planner Enger stated that he intended the 75% figure to be used only
as a guideline for development of the site.
Chairman Bearman stated that he felt it was imperative that the
issue of encroachment upon the High Density Residential site within
the City West Planned Unit Development Concept be resolved prior to
further discussions. He added that he felt the private looped road
through the site should be a public street.
Hallett concurred with Chairman Bearman regarding the private street
being public.
Motion carried--5-0-0
. A. CARMEL, by Hans Hagen Homes. Request for Planned Unit
Development District Review and Zoning District Change from
Rural to R1-13.5 and Preliminary Plat of 43 acres for single
family lots. Location: North of Rowland Road and West of
Planning Commission Minutes 4 December 12, 1983
• Old Shady Oak Road. A continued public hearing.
Staff reviewed the evolution of the design for this property,
indicating that some of the major revisions were made at the
recommendation of the Engineering and Planning Staff. Planner Enger
pointed out that the major issues appeared to be utility access and
road alignment through the property and the effects of these issues
upon the surrounding properties.
Planner Enger reviewed the most recent changes proposed by City
Staff, which included the following:
I . Access from the northerly east-west street to the park to
the north would be between Lots 4 and 5, Block 5.
2. The park to be dedicated to the City would be approximately
4.1 acres, satisfying the Cash Park Fee requirement for the
development. In addition, the City would purchase the
remaining acreage for $20,000.
3. Side yard setbacks of 5 ft. on one side and 10 ft. on the
other side would be allowed as a trade-off for preservation
of the majority of the trees and the major hill of the site.
• Planner Enger stated that he had a phone conversation with Roger
Farber, property owner to the southeast, at which time Mr. Farber
indicated that it was his desire to be included in the platting and
zoning of the Carmel Addition.
Chairman Bearman asked if the road alignment would work well with
the future needs of the adjacent land owners. Staff responded that,
in their opinion, it would.
Mrs. Gail Farber, 6525 Rowland Road, asked whether access would be
available to other residents of the neighborhood to the area
designated as park at the north end of the plat. Staff responded
that access would be available via the public streets.
Chairman Bearman asked Mrs. Farber if it would be her choice to
develop now, or to allow for the flexibility of development of her
property. Mrs. Farber responded that she would like to allow for
flexibility to develop, stated that she would prefer to build on the
lots at some future date. She stated that her main concern was not
to block out the possibility of development of their land for good,
in that the only developable area of their property was that part
adjacent to the Carmel Addition. The center of their parcel
consisted of marsh-type wetlands.
Chairman Bearman asked if the access road to the west property
should align with the intersection of Carmel Way with Carmel Drive.
Staff responded that at least 125 ft. existed between the two
intersections, which was adequate space in this particular
situation. Planner Enger pointed out that, geographically, the
proposed access to the west was in the best location.
Planning Commission Minutes 5 December 12, 1983
• Mr. Dean Holasek, 6475 Rowland Road, expressed concern regarding the
density of the property as proposed. He questioned whether it was
appropriate to allow greater density than existed in the area with
estate-sized lots.
Mr. Ken Beirsdorf, representing Len and Betty Uherka, 6301 Shady Oak
Road, questioned the impact of utilities upon his clients. Staff
reviewed the utilities planned for the property, indicating that the
final influence would be determined at a later date by the
Engineering Department at the time a feasibility study would be
prepared for the property.
Cliff Bodin, 6400 Shady Oak Road, asked if locations were known for
the sewer and water alignment of trunks. Staff responded that
preliminary locations were indicated by the utility plans of the
proponent; however, the final location would be influenced by the
desires of the property owners affected.
Mrs. Farber asked if the City had the ability to change the zoning
to R1-44. Chairman Bearman responded that, while this was possible,
the project had been proposed at R1-13.5 and that the developer was
within the parameters of the Comprehensive Guide Plan and Zoning
District regulations with his proposal. Therefore, the City was
required to respond to the proposal as presented.
Mr. Ron Pavelka, 6324 Shady Oak Road, stated that his preference
would be to run utility trunks along property lines, rather than
through a property. In that manner, adjacent benefitting property
owners would share the cost of the access to the utilities.
Mrs. Ernest Larsen, 6509 Rowland Road, stated that townhouses had
been proposed on the property before, and that the neighborhood had
responded negatively to that proposal. She stated that she felt the
current proposal was a good one, within the requirements of the
City, and that the developer had taken steps to maintain as much of
the amenities of the site as possible.
Hallett asked what the timing was for upgrading of Rowland Road.
Staff responded that the Hennepin County Park Reserve District had
indicated that the work would be started within two years. The City
would be required to make the interim improvements.
Hallett stated that he felt the developer should participate in the
interim improvements.
MOTION 1 :
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to close the
public hearing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
Planning Commission Minutes 6 December 12, 1983
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Hallett, to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request for Planned Unit Development
District Review and Zoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for the Carmel
Addition by Hans Hagen Homes for single family lots, based on
revised plans dated November 22, 1983, and written materials dated
September 22, 1983, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated October 21, 1983.
Hallett stated that he felt the access to the Hennepin County Park
Reserve District's Bryant Lake Park should be located further west
than the intersection of Carmel Drive with Rowland Road. Staff
responded that the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources
Commission would be dealing with this issue with their review of the
project.
Chairman Bearman questioned whether it would be better to zone the
property as R1-44. Planner Enger responded that the R1-44 zoning
district would not necessarily provide a better situation for this
property. He pointed out that in order to preserve the amenities,
large lots would work to a point; however, there would be higher
density in other areas of the site to bring the project up to a
potential 2.5 units per acre.
Motion carried--4-1-0 (Chairman Bearman against)
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Schuck, to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request for preliminary plat of 43
acres for single family lots for the Carmel Addition by Hans Hagen
Homes, based on revised plans dated November 22, 1983, and written
materials dated September 22, 1983, subject to the recommendations
of the Staff Report dated October 21, 1983.
Motion carried--4-1-0 (Chairman Bearman against)
Chairman Bearman stated that he voted against as he felt the
property would be more appropriately zoned R1-44.
C. WELSH CONSTRUCTION. Request for Zoning District Change from
C-Regional to C-Regional Service for 3.26 acres for an
office building. Location: East of the Northeast corner of
Prairie Center Drive and West 78th Street. A public
meeting.
Mr. Paul Dunn, Welsh Construction, reviewed the site features and
characteristics of the project site. Mr. David Shea, Shea
Architects, explained the architectural design of the structure,
lighting plans, and building usage.
Planner Enger reviewed the recommendations of the Staff Report for
the requested zoning district change.
Planning Commission Minutes 7 December 12, 1983
Chairman Bearman asked for comments and questions from members of
the audience. There were none.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Schuck, to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request of Welsh Construction for
zoning from C-Regional to C-Regional Service for 3.27 acres for an
office building, based on revised plans dated December 6, 1983, and
revised written materials dated December 5, 1983, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated December 9, 1983.
Motion carried--5-0-0
D. HUSTAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. Request for Rezoning from
C-Regional to C-Regional Service of approximately nine (9)
acres for a hotel and related commercial uses. Location:
Southeast quadrant of Highway 5/U.S. 169 and I-494. A
public meeting.
Mr. Wally Hustad reviewed the request with the Commission. The
hotel was to be a Brock Residence Inn, with the related commercial
uses to be a family and supper club restaurants for the total nine
acres. There would also possibly be an office building on the site,
• if design allowed.
Mr. Ken Nelson, General Partner of the Eden Prairie Hotel Company,
the future owners of the hotel, explained that there would be 16
buildings with eight units in each building. Also, there would be a
Gate House toward the center of the project, which would include the
lobby and office for the hotel . Eden Prairie Hotel Company would be
the owners of a franchise from Brock Residence. By way of
background, Mr. Nelson stated that Brock was the largest franchisee
of Holiday Inns in the United States and was listed on the New York
Stock Exchange. ,
Mr. Nelson added that the exterior material would be brick and the
total number of units would be 128.
Hallett asked if mass transit would be available at the hotel . Mr.
Nelson responded that transportation to the airport would be
available. Hallett also asked about the amount of parking to be
made available on the site. Mr. Nelson responded that there would
be at least one space for each unit, each employee, and four for the
conference room in the Gate House.
Staff reviewed the recommendations of the Staff Report, indicating
that, due to the nature of the request, the developer's agreement
for the project would require full site plan review by the Planning
Commission and Council by a date certain in order to maintain the
zoning on the hotel portion of the site.
Planning Commission Minutes 8 December 12, 1983
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to recommend to
the City Council approval of the request of Brock Residence Inn for
zoning from C-Regional to C-Regional Service of approximately three
acres for a hotel, based on the recommendations of the Staff Report
dated December 9, 1983.
Motion carried--4-1-0 (Chairman Bearman voted against)
Vj OLD BUSINESS
None.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
None.
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
None.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
r� MOTION TO ADJOURN was made by Schuck, seconded by Gartner.
Chairman Bearman adjourned the meeting at 11 :15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kate Karnas
Recording Secretary